What do systematic reviews say?

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement probably leads to lower subgroup analysis:Incidence of parastomal hernia (sublay… compared with standard treatment (moderate certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.48 [0.36, 0.64]
  7 studies · 619 participants
  Moderate

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement showed no clear difference in subgroup analysis:Incidence of parastomal hernia (intraperitoneal… compared with standard treatment (moderate certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.76 [0.55, 1.06]
  2 studies · 101 participants
  Moderate

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement may leads to lower incidence of parastomal hernia (worst‐case scenario sensitivity… compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.49 [0.3, 0.81]
  10 studies · 835 participants
  Low

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement may leads to lower incidence of parastomal hernia (best‐case scenario sensitivity… compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.4 [0.26, 0.61]
  10 studies · 835 participants
  Low

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement showed no clear difference in reoperation rate ( compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.9 [0.5, 1.64]
  9 studies · 757 participants
  Low

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement showed no clear difference in operative time for index procedure ( compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  6 studies · 671 participants
  Low

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement showed no clear difference in postoperative length of stay ( compared with standard treatment (moderate certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  4 studies · 500 participants
  Moderate

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement showed no clear difference in stoma‐related infection ( compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.89 [0.32, 2.5]
  6 studies · 472 participants
  Low

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  4 studies · 128 participants
  GRADE not reported

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 263 participants
  GRADE not reported

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Prosthetic mesh placement vs usual care

Prosthetic mesh placement may leads to lower subgroup analysis: Incidence of parastomal hernia at 12 months compared with standard treatment (low certainty).

• Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.47 [0.29, 0.78]
  7 studies · 592 participants
  Low

Fatty acid vs other topical intervention or standard care

Fatty acid showed no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence: fatty acid vs olive oil compared with other topical intervention or standard care (low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.28 [0.76, 2.17]
  2 studies · 1060 participants
  Low
• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.7 [0.41, 1.18]
  2 studies · 187 participants
  Low

Active topical agent vs placebo or control

It is very uncertain whether active topical agent changes stage 3 pressure ulcer incidence: Conotrane vs placebo compared with placebo/control (very low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.25 [0.34, 4.55]
  1 study · 258 participants
  Very low

Active topical agent vs placebo or control

It is very uncertain whether active topical agent changes stage 4 pressure ulcer incidence: Conotrane vs placebo compared with placebo/control (very low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.33 [0.01, 8.11]
  1 study · 258 participants
  Very low

Active topical agent vs placebo or control

It is very uncertain whether active topical agent changes adverse events: active lotion vs placebo compared with placebo/control (very low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 6.14 [0.29, 129.89]
  1 study · 167 participants
  Very low

Silicone dressing vs no dressing

Silicone dressing may leads to lower pressure ulcer incidence compared with no dressing (low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.25 [0.16, 0.41]
  6 studies · 1247 participants
  Low

Silicone dressing vs no dressing

It is very uncertain whether silicone dressing changes stage 1 pressure ulcer incidence compared with no dressing (very low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.27 [0.08, 0.9]
  3 studies · 749 participants
  Very low

Silicone dressing vs no dressing

It is very uncertain whether silicone dressing changes stage 2 pressure ulcer incidence compared with no dressing (very low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.4 [0.17, 0.94]
  4 studies · 1090 participants
  Very low

Silicone dressing vs no dressing

It is very uncertain whether silicone dressing changes stage 4 pressure ulcer incidence compared with no dressing (very low certainty).

• Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.2 [0.01, 4.13]
  1 study · 322 participants
  Very low